Kubuntu 11.10: "Right off the bat the first thing I noticed is that it is extremely snappy. Really, really snappy and responds extremely well. I was pretty impressed with just how smooth everything was."

So clearly for some people it is fine, and for some people it is not. That's always the case; software tends to be judged by the worst-case though (as it should be), because those are the cases that still have to be fixed.

There's no need to maintain that everything is perfect in KDE-land, there are sore-spots just like in GNOME or any other software project.

So clearly for some people it is fine, and for some people it is not. That's always the case; software tends to be judged by the worst-case though (as it should be), because those are the cases that still have to be fixed.

There's no need to maintain that everything is perfect in KDE-land, there are sore-spots just like in GNOME or any other software project.

Sigh! Not this again.

If KDE is not stable and performing well on some rare systems out there, then clearly this must be due to some aspect of those systems that is different from the vast majority of systems on which KDE does perform extremely well.

Since KDE itself is the same on all systems, any such performance problem (if indeed there is one, as objective hard evidence is rarely offered) must lie outside of KDE.

The video drivers are the most likely place in which any such problems may lie. Wherever it is, it is not in KDE itself. If there was a problem in KDE itself, it would be a problem for everyone who runs KDE.